Rape: A Philosophical Analysis of Feminist and Evolutionary Explanations

1

• Rape A Philosophical Analysis of Feminist
  and Evolutionary Explanations
• Griet Vandermassen
• Centre for Gender Studies
• Ghent University, Belgium

2
I. Overview
3
Definition

• Is usually considered a legal term, but because
  of cultural and historical variations in rape
  statutes, researchers often use their own
  definitions of rape
• Sexual intimacy with the use or threat of
  physical force against the will of the other
  party

4
Prevalence

• Estimates vary widely, depending upon definition
  methodology used
• The most underreported crime
• Majority of rapes occur among persons who are
  romantically involved (date rapes). Not highly
  violent, least probability of being reported
• Most reported rapes by strangers. More likely to
  be taken seriously by police courts
• Most US studies 1 out of 4 women, with only one
  fourth involving serious threat of injury. Europe
  and Japan rates 3 to 10 times lower

5
Problems of heterogeneity

• Rape exists along a continuum in terms of amount
  of force, risk of injury, and degree of
  nonconsent involved
• Offenders highly heterogeneous. No profile of
  THE rapist
• Theory proliferation rather than integration.
  Study of rape reflects disciplinary boundaries of
  academic world
• Rape remains insufficiently understood to be
  effectively prevented. My aim comparative study
  of existing models (epistemic relationship,
  strengths weaknesses, metaphysical
  ideological assumptions, communication)

6
Against Our Will Men, Women and Rape (1975)

• Rape is nothing more than a conscious process of
  intimidation by which all men keep all women in a
  state of fear (15)
• does one need scientific methodology in order to
  conclude that the anti-female propaganda that
  permeates our nations cultural output promotes a
  climate in which acts of sexual hostility against
  women are not only tolerated but ideologically
  encouraged? (395)

Susan Brownmiller
7

• Most feminist social science rape literature
  does not articulate, or attempt to test, testable
  predictions
• difficult to test how well it measures up to
  evolutionary theories
• Feminist social science studies only 10
  devoted to causes. Majority are descriptive
  e.g., attitudes about rape, treatment of victim
  (Thiessen Young 1994)

8
A Natural History of Rape Biological Bases of
Sexual Coercion (2000)
Randy Thornhill
Craig Palmer
9
A Natural History of Rape

• EITHER rape is an adaptation it has been
  directly selected for because it conferred a
  reproductive advantage. Is a conditional strategy
  (Thornhill)
• OR it is the byproduct of other psychological
  adaptations, primarily the male disposition for
  promiscuity and impersonal sex (Palmer)
• Rape is sexually motivated, not motivated by
  nonsexual motives such as the desire for power
  and control
• Current social science research amounts to
  ideology only an evolutionary perspective can
  help us understand why rape occurs
• The choice between the social science
  explanations answers and the evolutionarily
  informed answers provided in this book is
  essentially a choice between ideology and
  knowledge (189)

10
Hostility on both sides

• Book reviews misconceptions abound. Genetic
  determinism, urge for reproductive success,
  condoning rape, supporting patriarchy,
  blaming the victim, etc.
• A lot of personal attacks. Brownmiller
  Thornhills extra-special loony ideas,
  garbage
• Few people have read the book carefully or wanted
  to represent and evaluate it in an intellectually
  honest way

11
Strengths ANHR

• Based on large body of biological evidence
• Informed by knowledge of how evolutionary
  processes affect design of the human mind and,
  consequently, behavior
• Points out that inaccurate assumptions about
  causes of rape carry costs (e.g., chemical
  castration)
• Demonstrates that the males of many other species
  force copulation as well ? may increase our
  understanding of rape in humans

12
Weaknesses ANHR

• Combative, arrogant tone
• Naive conception of science as always objective
  and value free
• Simplistic representation of feminist theories
• Insistence that only evolutionary approach can be
  productive
• Lack of attention for proximate mechanisms
  mediating sexually aggressive behavior

13
ANHR evidence inconclusive. But

• Evolutionary perspective sheds light on many
  aspects of rape
• Ultimate causes evolved differences male-female
  sexuality. Evolution did not lead to women
  wanting to have sex with any male or to men only
  wanting to have sex with consenting females
  (otherwise rape would not exist)

14
II. Some issues, problems and disagreements
15
1. Definitional ambiguities

• Rape is about violence, not sex 4,096 possible
  meanings

Jones O. (2000). Law and the Biology of Rape.
Hastings Womens Law Journal 11151-178.
16
2. Motives and tactics causes and meanings

• Motives for rape and tactics used to achieve rape
  often get mixed up by scholars
• Actual effects need not be intended effects
  meanings to victim need not reveal causes of rape
• Causes proximate and ultimate

17
3. Appropriateness of term rape

• Many feminists rape only properly applies to
  humans. Its application to other species too
  emotionally evocative trivializes rape serves
  to undermine ten years of feminist
  consciousness-raising (Blackman 1985)
• Thornhill Palmer 2000 this excludes behavior
  of other animals as potential source of
  information
• ? Is it really a matter of language, or of
  censuring the Darwinian program?

18
4. Accounts of human nature

• Evolutionists our species-typical psychological
  adaptations together constitute a universal human
  nature
• Feminists a purely ontogenetic account of human
  nature (social constructionism), often for
  political reasons
• E.g. Angie Burns (2000) subverting gender
  categories rather than seeking gender differences
  seems to offer the best way to challenge gender
  inequality
• Difficult to see how to reconcile these views

19
5. Naturalistic fallacy

• to reason directly from is to ought
• Often committed or feared by critics
• But critics run risk of committing symmetrical
  logic errors
• the moralistic fallacy assuming that what
  ought to be is what is
• the anti-naturalistic fallacy assuming that the
  facts have no bearing on morality whatsoever (but
  ethics must be somehow based on an appreciation
  of what humans are and want)

20
The Confluence Model of Sexual Aggression (Neil
Malamuth)

• Combining feminist and evolutionary perspectives
• Empirically well-supported model (the only one?)
• Risk factors predicting sexual aggression
  combination of two clusters of characteristics
• Hostile Masculinity Path
• Impersonal Sex Path

21
Needed

• Incorporating multiple levels of scientific
  analysis evolutionary, genetic, cultural,
  developmental, personality and situational
  factors
• Missing from most evolutionary accounts
  specification of possible proximate mechanisms
• Distinguishing between ? types (may have ?
  causes)
• Correlation with violent crimes in general.
  Overlooked too often?
• Pedophilia